204

writes:--"What a pity it was that you did not
"entrust the whole of that affair to me. I
"could have polished it off as smoothly as you
"please. I spoke to Morris" (one of the Board
of Audit, the appointee of the Superintendent)
"and found that there was not the slightest
"necessity for all the stew in which you have
"placed both you and myself. There is no
"intention of reporting anything detrimental
"to you."

Adverting next to the official letter of the
20th September, in which the Superintendent
is openly accused of having the deficient ba-
lance, it appears that the Superintendent nei-
ther suspended the Treasurer, nor brought his
conduct under the notice of the Executive
Council.

The Superintendent's explanation is, that
the letter referred to was written in a fit of
indignation; that, knowing this, he put the
letter in his pocket for a couple of days, until
the writer should have time to cool down.
That he then took the letter to Mr. M'Glashan
and pointed out the paragraph in question,
asked if he intended that to be his official an-
swer to a letter which he (the Superintendent)
would address to him, calling for explanations
on the various topics alluded to in the Au-
ditors' report. Mr. M'Glashan said it was not
his official answer, and that it had better be
withdrawn; that, when called on, his explan-
ation of that part of the report would be "the
payments at the South." The letter, the Su-
perintendent adds, was accordingly withdrawn,

and the first he afterwards saw or heard of it
was a copy given in by Mr. M'Glashan in his
answer before the Select Committee.

Mr. M'Glashan, on his attention being called
to the statement of Mr. Macandrew, says that
they are a tissue of untruths, in some parts
interwoven with incidents that occurred, but
are of no importance; that the conversation
regarding his letter of the 20th September is
a pure fiction; that he never withdrew the
letter, nor was he asked to withdraw it; that
the Superintendent seems to have forgotten
that he (Mr. M'Glashan) had already told
Mr. Morris and Mr. Reynolds that the Super-
intendent had the deficient money, and had
shown them his cheques. He had, moreover,
told the Superintendent that he had done so.

There seems no rational doubt, from the
evidence, that the Superintendent's real motive,
in withholding the letter from the Executive
Council was to save his own credit. He states
himself, in one of his notes, when the Provin-
cial Treasurer appears to have threatened to
bring the matter before the Executive--"The
"party who told you that I had been paying
"other people you had a gross falsehood. I
"cannot pay you to-day; and if you take the
"proceeding you threaten, you only make it
"the worse for both of us. If you had only
"or would only leave me to manage matters,
"it would have been all right ere now, and
"would be so, indeed will be so still.

(Signed) CHARLES KNIGHT,
Commissioner.

EVIDENCE TAKEN BY THE COMMISSIONER.

MR. STREET--Examined.

Question. How long have you held the ap-
pointment of Accountant to the Provincial
Treasury?

Answer. Since July 1859.

Q. Has the cash in the Treasury Chest
been counted by the Board of Audit since you
have held your present office?

A. No, it has not.

Q. Had you access to the Provincial Trea-
surer's cash box, and did you at any time
count the cash therein?

A. I had not. I never counted the cash;
it was in no way my duty to do so.

Q. Could the petty cash issued to you by
the Provincial Treasurer, which was deposited
at the Union Bank in your name, be drawn
upon by the Provincial Treasurer?

A. No, it could not.

Q. I see by the Bank Book that the amount
issued to you during the three months ending
31st March 1860, amounted to about £7500?

A. Yes; the amount was unusually large,
owing to the absence of the Treasurer. The
average quarterly amount is about £2500.
Under the existing regulations, the balance of
petty cash is not allowed to exceed £20.

Q. Was any portion of the petty cash issued
to you under the warrant of the Superinten-
dent?

A. No; but there was a general order
authorising the Provincial Treasurer to issue
petty cash to me to the extent of £500.

Q. I understand from your explanations
that monies issued in one quarter are some-
times shown in the Cash Book among the
transactions of the prior quarter, and some-
times among those of the subsequent quarter.
That in fact the Cash Book does not shew
the transactions chronologically arranged; and
never shews the balance with which the Trea-
surer is chargeable. The Bank Book alone
shews the payments in the order in which they
were actually made?

A. It was so, but it is not so now.

Q. I see by the Bank Book that several
payments on account of Public Works at In-
vercargill are placed to the credit of the Pro-
vincial Treasurer?

A. These sums are payments made to Mr.
Logie, the Sub-treasurer of the General Go-
vernment, in repayment of receipts in aid of
the Provincial Agent at Invercargill. When
the Agent's accounts are forwarded to the
Provincial Treasury, he receives credit for the
amount. But these transactions as they ap-
pear in the books of the Treasury, in no way
throw out the cash balance of the Provincial
Treasurer.

Q. I observe in the Bank Book a payment
of £180 2s. 10d. for "Wages Public Works."

A. The money was issued in payment of
wages without the Superintendent's warrants.
If proved to be in excess of the amount re-
quired, the balance was refunded to the Trea-
surer. This transaction would not be shewn
in the Cash Book until the warrant for the
amount had been issued. Any sum so paid
for which the covering warrant was not issued
until the next quarter would cause a deficiency